Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares145 Views

      in Elections

      Citing N.I.H. Cuts, a Top Science Journal Stops Accepting Submissions

      by

      With federal support, Environmental Health Perspectives has long published peer-reviewed studies without fees to readers or scientists.Environmental Health Perspectives, widely considered the premier environmental health journal, has announced that it would pause acceptance of new studies for publication, as federal cuts have left its future uncertain.For more than 50 years, the journal has received funding from the National Institutes of Health to review studies on the health effects of environmental toxins — from “forever chemicals” to air pollution — and publish the research free of charge.The editors made the decision to halt acceptance of studies because of a “lack of confidence” that contracts for critical expenses like copy-editing and editorial software would be renewed after their impending expiration dates, said Joel Kaufman, the journal’s top editor.He declined to comment on the publication’s future prospects. “If the journal is indeed lost, it is a huge loss,” said Jonathan Levy, chair of the department of environmental health at Boston University. “It’s reducing the ability for people to have good information that can be used to make good decisions.”The news comes weeks after a federal prosecutor in Washington sent letters to several scientific journals, including The New England Journal of Medicine, with questions that suggested that they were biased against certain views and influenced by external pressures.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares122 Views

      in Elections

      Pierre Poilievre Raised Canada’s Conservative Party, Only to Be Tossed From His Seat

      by

      Pierre Poilievre lost the vote for a constituency he has held for 21 years to a Liberal political neophyte. His populist approach may have been to blame.When protesting truckers rolled toward downtown Ottawa and proceeded to occupy the Canadian capital for four weeks, they got a welcome from a man waving to them from a highway overpass, his hands covered in knitted red mittens with white maple leaves on the palms.The man was Pierre Poilievre, who would become the leader of the Conservative Party and who until just recently was widely referred to as Canada’s next prime minister. Soon he will have a new title: ex-Member of Parliament.In a stunning upset, voters in Mr. Poilievre’s district (or riding, as it is known in Canada) turned him out of office on Monday. His embrace of the so-called Freedom Convoy of 2022, appears to have played a significant role in the defeat.Voters in this part of Canada have memories of that time — and not fond ones.With Ottawa paralyzed, local businesses forced to shut down and residents struggling to sleep amid the round-the-clock air horn blasting, Mr. Poilievre brought coffee and doughnuts to the truckers, who were protesting pandemic restrictions and the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.On Tuesday, his support for the convoy, some leaders of which recently received criminal convictions, was a recurring complaint among voters in his district, Carleton.“Populist politics is not for me,” declared one voter, Rick Pauloski, who said he had supported Conservatives in the past.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares122 Views

      in Elections

      Judge Temporarily Blocks Border Patrol’s Stop-and-Arrest Tactics in California

      by

      Border Patrol agents carried out sweeps in California’s Central Valley. Lawyers argued that people were stopped and arrested based on their skin color.In January, Border Patrol agents conducted sweeps through immigrant communities in California’s Central Valley, arresting nearly 80 individuals the agency said were unlawfully present in the United States.Officials said the operation, named “Return to Sender,” was intended to target undocumented immigrants with serious criminal backgrounds. But lawyers for those arrested argued that the agents had simply rounded up people who appeared to be day laborers and farm workers, regardless of their actual immigration status, without having a legally sound reason to suspect they were in the country illegally.On Tuesday, a federal judge in California issued a preliminary injunction barring Border Patrol agents from stopping individuals without having a reasonable suspicion of illegal presence, as required by the Fourth Amendment.The judge also blocked agents from making warrantless arrests unless they have probable cause to believe the person is likely to flee before a warrant can be obtained.The Trump administration has adopted increasingly aggressive tactics in pursuit of its goal of mass deportations, but has faced pushback from the judiciary. The California ruling marks the latest attempt by courts to rein in enforcement actions that appear to conflict with long-established constitutional and legal protections.Judge Jennifer L. Thurston of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California noted in her ruling that the government did not “dispute or rebut” the “significant anecdotal evidence” from the plaintiffs regarding Border Patrol’s stop-and-arrest practices.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares130 Views

      in Elections

      U.N. Orders Agencies to Find Budget Cuts, Including via Staff Moves From N.Y.

      by

      The instructions from the office of Secretary General António Guterres were reviewed by The New York Times and came after President Trump ordered a review of U.S. funding to the agency.The United Nations, anticipating that President Trump will slash U.S. contributions to the global body, has told its departments to draw up plans for budget cuts, including through staff relocations from New York and Geneva to less-expensive cities.The instructions — outlined in a two-page memo dated April 25 that was reviewed by The New York Times — were sent from Secretary General António Guterres’s office to the heads of all agencies that report directly to him. The memo set a May 15 deadline for all proposals so that they could be added to the 2026 budget.“Your objective is to identify as many functions as possible that could be relocated to existing lower-cost locations,” the memo reads, “or otherwise reduced or abolished if they are duplicative or no longer viable.”In February, President Trump signed an executive order calling for a review of the overall U.S. funding and ties to the U.N. He withdrew the United States from several U.N. organizations, including those dealing with human rights, women’s reproductive rights, climate change, Palestinian aid and global health. In his first term, he also reduced U.S. contributions to peacekeeping efforts.Three senior U.N. officials said on Tuesday that the drastic, cost-cutting measures laid out in the memo had caught the agency’s departments by surprise and went beyond what they had expected. The officials, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said the directive was largely viewed as a way for the U.N. to brace for potential additional cuts by Mr. Trump and to proactively insulate it from the financial blow.But the U.N. officials said the budget cuts were ordered only partly in response to Mr. Trump’s moves. The directive comes as the U.N. is adjusting to a host of financial problems, they said, from the withdrawal and reduction in financial contributions by major donors like the United States and Europe to a cash-flow crisis caused by member states’ not paying their annual dues on time and in full.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares95 Views

      in Elections

      White House Assails Amazon, Citing Tariff Pricing Report

      by

      The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, attacked the retail giant over a report that suggested Amazon would display the cost of tariff-related price increases. Amazon said it never considered doing so on its main website.There’s a fresh spat brewing between the White House and Amazon.Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, on Tuesday accused the online retail giant of being “hostile and political,” citing a report — disputed by Amazon — from Punchbowl News saying that the company would start displaying the exact cost of tariff-related price increases alongside its products.Displaying the import fees would have made clear to American consumers that they are shouldering the cost of President Trump’s tariff policies rather than China, as he and his top officials have often claimed would be the case.An Amazon spokesman said the company had considered a similar idea on part of its site, Amazon Haul, which competes with Temu, a Chinese retailer. Temu primarily ships directly to consumers and has begun displaying “import charges” to reflect the end of a customs loophole that had exempted low-priced items from tariffs.“Teams discuss ideas all the time,” the spokesman, Ty Rogers, said in a statement. “This was never a consideration for the main Amazon site and nothing has been implemented on any Amazon properties.”Standing beside Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent during a briefing at the White House on Tuesday morning, Ms. Leavitt tore into the retailer. She said that she had just been on the phone with the president about the report, and she asked why Amazon hadn’t done such a thing when prices increased during the Biden administration because of inflation.Ms. Leavitt said it was “not a surprise” coming from Amazon, as she held up a copy of a 2021 article from Reuters with the headline, “Amazon partnered with China propaganda arm.” Mr. Trump’s aggressive tariffs on Chinese goods have touched off an escalating trade war, even as his administration has backed off its broader global levies amid what it said were negotiations with dozens of nations on new trade deals.Ms. Leavitt’s attack on Amazon was all the more noteworthy because the company’s founder, Jeff Bezos, has lately gone to great lengths to curry favor with this White House. Amazon donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural fund, securing seats for Mr. Bezos and his bride-to-be in the Capitol Rotunda for the inauguration.In December, Mr. Bezos explained his Trump-ward turn while speaking at The New York Times DealBook conference. “What I’ve seen so far is he is calmer than he was the first time,” Mr. Bezos said of Mr. Trump, “more confident, more settled.”He added, “I’m very hopeful. He seems to have a lot of energy around reducing regulation.”Ms. Leavitt was asked whether the White House still considered Mr. Bezos to be a Trump supporter, given the latest report.“Look, I will not speak to the president’s relationships with Jeff Bezos,” Ms. Leavitt said, “but I will tell you that this is certainly a hostile and political action by Amazon.” More

    • 163 Shares127 Views

      in Elections

      Beyoncé Cowboy Carter Tour Review; The Star Remixes American History, and Her Own

      by

      The last time Beyoncé performed “Daddy Lessons,” the stomping, biting number from her 2016 album, “Lemonade,” was at that year’s C.M.A. Awards, in a blistering rendition alongside the Dixie Chicks (now the Chicks).Not everyone in country music embraced Beyoncé’s experimentation. “I did not feel welcomed,” she wrote in album notes leading up to the release last year of “Cowboy Carter,” her eighth solo album, an exploration of the many tendrils of American roots music and their connections to Black music of all stripes and generations.So it was meaningful, and pointed, that at the opening night of the Cowboy Carter Tour at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, Calif., on Monday, Beyoncé played “Daddy Lessons” for the first time since that rejection. It came right after she sang her renovated version of Dolly Parton’s “Jolene” — approved by the country royal herself — while soaring over the rapturous crowd in a flying horseshoe.Full-circle moments don’t just happen — they are the products of intention and diligence and allergy to loose threads. Throughout this roisterous and clever show, there were suggestions that loop-closing has been very much on Beyoncé’s mind, along with culmination.At almost three hours long, her seventh solo headlining concert tour was a characteristic Beyoncé epic. The New York TimesBeyoncé’s Cowboy Carter show featured the debut of many of the album’s songs, but also brought back tracks from across her catalog.The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares151 Views

      in Elections

      Torture and Secret C.I.A. Prisons Haunt 9/11 Case in Judge’s Ruling

      by

      Prosecutors have said they will appeal the decision, although they lost a similar appeal this year.When a military judge threw out a defendant’s confession in the Sept. 11 case this month, he gave two main reasons.The prisoner’s statements, the judge ruled, were obtained through the C.I.A.’s use of torture, including beatings and sleep deprivation.But equally troubling to the judge was what happened to the prisoner in the years after his physical torture ended, when the agency held him in isolation and kept questioning him from 2003 to 2006.The defendant, Ammar al-Baluchi, is accused of sending money and providing other support to some of the hijackers who carried out the terrorist attack, which killed 3,000 people. In court, Mr. Baluchi is charged as Ali Abdul Aziz Ali.He is the nephew of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man accused of masterminding the plot.The judge, Col. Matthew N. McCall, wrote that it was easy to focus on the torture because it was “so absurdly far outside the norms of what is expected of U.S. custody preceding law enforcement questioning.”“However,” he added, “the three and a half years of uncharged, incommunicado detention and essentially solitary confinement — all while being continually questioned and conditioned — is just as egregious” as the physical torture.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Fact-Checking Trump’s False Claims in His First 100 Days in Office

      by

      The president’s dizzying efforts to reconfigure the global economy, reshape the federal government and restrict immigration have been undergirded by a nonstop distortion of facts.President Trump, intent on enacting an expansive agenda, has moved at a dizzying pace in the first 100 days of his term, issuing a barrage of executive actions and seeking to expand the scope of his presidential power.Underlying those efforts is a nonstop distortion of basic facts as Mr. Trump has sought to reconfigure the global economy, reshape the federal government and restrict immigration.To justify his executive actions and policies, Mr. Trump has relied on false, misleading and hyperbolic claims, deflecting blame for catastrophes, boasting about purported achievements and trying to seek leverage with Ukraine in negotiating a peace deal with Russia.Here is a fact-check of Mr. Trump’s often-repeated claims.Federal CutsImmigrationTrade and the EconomyMilitary and International ConflictsFederal CutsIn his breakneck effort to transform the federal bureaucracy, Mr. Trump has offered misleading justifications. He has often echoed dubious claims about so-called fraud made by Elon Musk, the billionaire leading the cost-cutting initiative known as the Department of Government Efficiency.What Was Said“Could you mention some of the things that your team has found, some of the crazy numbers, including the woman that walked away with about $30 million?”— in a February appearance with Mr. MuskWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More